Bin Laden Death Changed Little in Fight Against Terrorism

May 1 (Bloomberg) -- One year on, the death of Osama bin
Laden is starting to feel more like an asterisk than a
milestone.

Yes, al-Qaeda’s capacity for organized mayhem has been
significantly diminished. But the U.S. remains embroiled in
Afghanistan, with a commitment of resources that will span the
next decade. Pakistan swarms with murderous extremists of
various stripes, and its relations with the U.S. are, to put it
mildly, toxic. From Yemen through Iraq and across Africa to
Mauritania, groups affiliated with al-Qaeda are becoming more
aggressive; scarcely a week passes in Nigeria without some
grisly attack by Boko Haram, an Islamist sect whose name
translates to “Western education is forbidden.”

We don’t begrudge Barack Obama’s attempt to take some
political credit for ordering a bold military mission. (Although
an ad starring former President Bill Clinton, whose
administration failed to stop Osama bin Laden, was perhaps not
the savviest choice.) But, looking ahead, what’s needed is some
humility about the challenges that still face the U.S. and some
clarity about the means with which to overcome them.

The Obama administration rightly sought to expunge the
phrase “war on terror” from the strategic lexicon and to reject
any hint of a war on Islam. Terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy.
Yet defining the U.S. fight as against al-Qaeda and its “violent
extremist affiliates … around the world” -- as the 2010 National
Security Strategy puts it -- strikes us as also off the mark:
The spread of al-Qaeda’s brand to copycat groups potentially
consigns the U.S. to a costly and ineffectual global game of
Whac-A-Mole with deadly stakes.

Just as the Obama administration has used bin Laden’s death
to recalibrate the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, it should
set clear and discerning limits on its involvement in fighting
these “extremist affiliates.” Some may not pose a direct threat
to the U.S. -- unless, that is, U.S. forces get involved. Others
do, and increasingly the tool to combat them is drone strikes
like the one that killed the U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki in
Yemen. Although we support the policy in general, we still await
the Obama administration’s release of a detailed and consistent
policy on criteria used when such strikes are authorized.

Justified or not, faceless death from the skies tends not
to win many hearts and minds on the ground. If the U.S. wants to
curb violent extremism in the Muslim world, it can provide more
support for political reforms and economic development in those
countries roiled by the Arab Spring -- beginning with robust
leadership and follow-through at this week’s conference in Cairo
to spur private investment in Arab countries in transition. And
one added dividend of progress toward a settlement between
Israelis and Palestinians -- something that has been sorely
lacking these past three years -- would be a smaller pool of
extremist recruits.

There are two domestic changes that could also reap
dividends. The first is the closing of the prison at Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, and the moving of detainees to the U.S. -- something
that Congress has shamefully made impossible for the White
House. The second is to improve the transparency of the military
tribunal system used for suspected terrorists, which has been
reformed admirably in recent years. A good place to start is
with televising, to the extent that it won’t compromise national
security, the upcoming trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the
self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks.

This sober anniversary is a reminder that there will be no
Berlin-Wall-falls moment of victory in the effort against global
terrorists. But the U.S. can still prevail: by using clear
judgment before involving ourselves in foreign situations, by
weighing reasonable security steps at home against any erosion
of civil rights, and by doing our utmost to support the
aspirations of those now striving for peace, prosperity and
liberty.

Read more opinion online from Bloomberg View.

Today’s highlights: the View editors on the Osama bin Laden
anniversary and Spain’s labor reforms; Jeffrey Goldberg on the
death of Benzion Netanyahu; Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers
on the benefits of work-sharing; Ramesh Ponnuru on fertility
rates and foreign policy; and Peter Viktor Kunz on the benefits
of Swiss banks.